Michael Marschner

Labor Day, the one day out of the year that we celebrate all the hard work we do, was intended as a well deserved tribute to the men and women who worked in steel mills, factories, construction, and other such positions that the ruling elite look down on as “manual, menial” careers.  Labor Day has been a federal holiday since 1884, a year and an era when unions were necessary, were actually concerned about the workers who paid dues, and not simply seeking political influence.  The sad fact of modern American reality is that most of the jobs that Labor Day was intended to celebrate are now gone.  Government regulations, environmental regulations, and competition from overseas, have shut down the steel mills, the factories, and made life for “blue collar” workers hell. After all, how can a company, burdened with very costly government mandated OSHA and EPA regulations, compete with the prices of a company free from such regulations?  That is why Chinese steel is everywhere, and America is saddled with a “Rust” belt.

When conservatives talk of a free market based economy, they are not talking about NAFTA type treaties.  In 1993, before Bill Clinton signed NAFTA into law, many conservatives were opposed to the treaty.  The resistance was so strong that  the Heritage Foundation had to address it.  Clearly from that article, job creation was expected, as well as the idea that American companies could “take advantage” of Mexico’s “cheap” labor costs.  What does it mean to have a low labor cost, relative to a high labor cost?  In a nut shell, it means that companies can pay their workers less, because they expect less.  Many Americans on the Left and the Right supported that idea.  Payroll is always a companies largest expense, and finding ways to lower that is always high on a CEO’s priority list.  Oddly enough, the entire company benefits from this, a truth the left is reticent to admit.

NAFTA has never been a cause of illegal immigration.  The idea that Mexican farmers cannot compete with American ones is simply mistaken.  In reality, a great many of the fruits and vegetables we enjoy in America come from Mexico, whereas our own American Farmers are given government subsidies to grown nothing.  The root cause of illegal immigration from Mexico is the corruption and crime that is rampant in that nation.  Living in Las Vegas I have had many opportunities to speak with illegal Mexican immigrants, and they have almost all told me that they miss their nation, but “things are too bad there.”  America and our economy have not caused illegal immigration, rather, those men and women have taken a risk and tried to obtain a better life for themselves in a country relatively free from political corruption (at least so far.)  I do not object to that.  I object to them breaking our laws and draining our social safety nets, when our legal citizens are suffering.

Labor Day was meant to celebrate the American worker.  Today, in our globalized economy, the “American worker” is a term that has lost all its meaning.  Despite what Harry Reid said, most of the manual construction and landscape jobs in Las Vegas (and most cities) are done by illegals.  (Reids claim to the contrary surly ranks high among the most stupid things a human being has ever said.) The current blow-up in Arizona has nothing to do with NAFTA, nothing to do with Free Market economics, but everything to do with a states desire to protect its citizens.

Arizona SB 1070 was not written and passed because of racism, or prejudice against “Brown” people.  It was enacted because of the out of control drug violence in Mexico that is spilling over into Arizona and other border states.  When Governor Jan  Brewer requests 3,000 National Guard troops, and is only given 30 (thats 1%) is it any wonder that there is some angst against the Feds?  As for what Sheriff Joe is doing, I say keep it up.  My friends on the left view prison labor as “slave” labor.  This is their choice, just as it is their choice to remain ignorant of the economic realities surrounding the issue.

Billions of dollars are spent each year on our incarcerated population, and each year the tax payers receive higher crime rates and less safe communities as their ROI. What Sheriff Joe is doing is different, it is unique in America today, and it could be the solution to our woes.  If jails are not places people want to go, then perhaps they will think twice about a life of crime.  If prisoners in jail are given a job to do, perhaps they will acquire some life skills and be able to survive in the real world.  It is not about taking advantage of “slave” labor.  Cynicism and sophistry would like to claim it is, but it is about using scarce tax dollars better than we do now.  The current justice system has double digit recidivism rates.   Clearly something needs to change.  As someone diametrically opposed to Direct File and JLWOP I applaud what Sheriff Joe is trying to do.  Children who have made mistakes deserve a chance at a new life after rehabilitation.  Teaching them to work, stick to a schedule, and a marketable skill are far superior tactics than locking them away for decades.

As we celebrate Labor Day on Monday, most people I know will actually be at work.  The banks will be closed, the government will take a three day weekend, but ordinary hard working Americans like me will be at work.  Trying to survive a bone crunching recession caused by misguided democrat housing policies and made worse by a blind reliance on Keynesian economics.

By Seth Ford

As the son and grandson of union members, Labor Day has a special meaning for me. When I think of Labor Day, I imagine my grandfather hanging off a bridge upside down by his ankles for refusing to call off a strike at the old CF&I steel mill in Pueblo, Colorado. While I tend to be more moderate than my father and grandfather when it comes to labor issues in this country (i.e., I think unions ultimately shot themselves in the foot by demanding too much), I am also cognizant of the real and sometimes deadly sacrifices that working class Americans have made to win fair wages, decent treatment and reasonable hours.

This year, the United States finds itself in the throes of the longest, most taxing recession since the Great Depression. Millions are unemployed and millions more are having trouble making ends meet with the work they have. We don’t just live in a market economy, we now live at its mercy. Approximately 90% of the capital in this country is controlled by an equally approximate 1% of the population.

Almost 16 years ago, the government under the leadership of George H.W. Bush dramatically expanded “free market” power through the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).  This led to the displacement of millions of  Mexican farmers and other types of laborers who could not compete with the highly productive agriculture industry in the United States. These farmers, with very few other prospects, sought better lives North of the Mexican border. As the United States simultaneously shifted from an industrial-based economy to a service-based economy, many service sector industries welcomed the new illegal labor pool as a method of controlling labor costs. Restaurateurs and housing contractors, to name a few, knowingly hired illegal immigrants at lower wages than American counterparts and actively lobbied conservative representatives to keep regulation and oversight to a minimum.

With the economy in the doldrums, the issue of illegal immigration has come to a boiling point. Considering the “free market” conservative roots of the immigration problem in the United States, it is ironic that the Republican Governor of Arizona, Jan Brewer, and her “tough on crime, tough on brown people” lackey, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, are the most vocal proponents of a deportation policy. To me, it is outrageous that on the one hand conservatives like Jan Brewer would encourage illegal immigration to keep labor costs low but simultaneously deride the very problem her party helped to create. It is so outrageous, I have to wonder if there is an angle that involves profit motive.

It is no secret that Sheriff Arpaio has made his reputation on the cheap labor his prisoners provide to Maricopa County through his notorious tent city jail. According to his website, Arpaio’s chain gangs contribute thousands of dollars of free labor to the community: “The male chain gang, and the world’s first-ever female and juvenile chain gangs, clean streets, paint over graffiti, and bury the indigent in the county cemetery.” Never mind that those are jobs that good, taxpaying citizens could have.

What’s not clear is what percentage of Arpaio’s prisoners are currently illegal immigrants. Over the past few years, it has become clear that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and local Sheriffs aren’t exactly operating in concert. According to Wikipedia, about 31,000 people who are not American citizens are held in immigration detention on any given day, including children, in over 200 detention centers, jails, and prisons nationwide. According to WikiAnswers, ICE can detain an illegal immigrant for up to 90 days before deporting them. To someone like Sheriff Arpaio, that has to look like a huge slave labor pool that he can exploit while at the same time advocating for deportation.

Having a deportation policy as opposed to a border control policy is a win/win/win all the way down the line for someone like Arpaio. The fact is that many deported illegal aliens simply return to the United States the same way they came here. According to USImmigrationSupport.org, “the U.S. Border Patrol is often catching immigrants who were previously deported. For many it is not their first time, but rather their third, fourth, or even fifth deportation.” I’ve read dozens of articles about Arpaio in the last few days. No where, that I can find, does he or Jan Brewer ever advocate for better border control. I suspect that’s because shutting down the free and reduced labor pool isn’t in their long-term interests.

In the end, the debate over illegal immigration (at least from the Republican side) is a classic case of talking out both sides of your mouth. On the one hand, Republicans want “free markets,” “free trade” and a whole host of other “freedoms” that come at the expense of the rights that organized labor in the United States fought for decades to achieve (fair wages, decent working conditions, etc). On the other hand, they don’t win too many friends by giving jobs away so they have to appear to be “tough on immigration.” Never mind that the businesses and industries that Republicans represent are the biggest violators of immigration policy. So they find the happy medium: Deportation.

The fact is that we, as a nation, invited the illegal immigration issues we have.  It is incumbent on us to take responsibility for those issues. If we want people of other nations to respect our laws, we have to respect them ourselves. Businesses (Wal-Mart, Swift & Co., Tyson Foods, Gebbers) that hire illegal immigrants are just as culpable as immigrants themselves and yet there has been no outcry from people like Jan Brewer and no offer from Joe Arpaio to tie Wal-Mart executives onto his chain gang. Why?

In the end, Labor Day is about celebrating our hard work. It’s about the contributions that each of us have made to building this nation. The policies that people like Brewer and Arpaio advocate only contribute to tearing this nation down. If they take Monday off, they ought to be ashamed.

The star of Robert Rodriguez’s new film, Machete, wasn’t always just acting. In a recent interview with TIME, Danny Trejo talks about his career as a juvenile drug addict and armed robber; a career that took him to “every penitentiary in the state of California” before he turned his life around and became a drug counselor in L.A.

Trejo was a real live tough guy whose best friend applied his first prison tattoo with a needle and thread. He changed. As an adult, he’s led a stellar career that has placed him in more than 200 films playing (usually) the villain that he used to see himself as. The irony doesn’t escape him and he laughs off the violence portrayed in Machete by explaining that “[it's] almost funny. It’s not gory. You’re shocked, and then you laugh.”

The fact is that Trejo got lucky. Once they’re in, most kids like him don’t ever get out of the system. Some are relegated to institutions for the rest of their lives for a single mistake. In Colorado alone, there are 49 offenders sentenced to life without parole as children. Yet, some of those kids’ crimes were as innocuous as helping an armed robber like Trejo get away from what turned out to be a botched job. They are the unlucky few.

Many of us have stories like Trejo’s. Many of us had violent or abusive childhoods. Many of us were lucky enough not to get caught up in the system. Don’t we owe the unlucky ones a little understanding? Life sentences for kids–even the ones who were party to a criminal act that resulted in death–are wrong. They deny children the right to make the choice that Trejo made. They deny them the right to become adults.

If Trejo is an example of ‘the worst of the worst’ and he was rehabilitated then our denial of childrens’ humanity and potential for change is a truly sad reality.

It’s no secret that Clifford Joseph Harris, Jr. better known to the world as the rapper T.I. made some mistakes.  Those mistakes led to his arrest and conviction on a Federal weapons charge in 2007.  This was hardly his first run in with the law.  By the time young T.I. was 14 he had already been arrested numerous times, a sort of occupational hazard for teenage drug dealers.  The story of T.I. is not unique.  A young man grows up in a desperate situation, falls in with a bad crowd, makes immature decisions, and before you know it the young man is looking at serious criminal charges.  The story of T.I., however, is not totally tragic.

As his music career, which began at age 7,  was really taking off, and his future prospects went from dim to bright, T.I. realized that his street tough, “gangsta” life style was going to bring him nothing but loss and pain.  He put that realization into art form in his song “Dead and Gone.”  What is the lesson for Colorado in this?

Had T.I. been arrested in Colorado when he was a young teenager, would the juvenile justice system have allowed him to learn from his mistakes and essentially rehabilitate himself?  Given the atmosphere of revenge and blind retribution caused by the Direct File practices of DA’s, the answer to that question is most likely no.

This is not meant to imply that Colorado DA’s are not essentially good people who do not care about the safety and needs of the people they are elected to represent.  Rather, those DA’s are laboring under a misguided idea that children who commit serious crimes are somehow forever lost causes who need to be isolated and imprisoned until they are old men.  The life and story of T.I. shows that children who make mistakes can, and do, in fact learn from them.  Young thugs, no matter how hard or tough they think they are, do eventually realize that their lifestyle needs to change.

T.I. should be thanking his lucky star that he was not born in Colorado, otherwise he would never have had the chance to reach that conclusion.  T.I. would have become simply a statistic, another young man locked up for life, with no chance of parole.  JWOP might as well be a death sentence.  How many kids like T.I. are behind bars in Colorado?  How many souls are being sacrificed upon the alter of misguided retribution, when a little true rehabilitation and mercy could have made all the difference in the world?

When I was a kid, I was a big fan of Full House, which among others starred Bob Saget, John Stamos and Jodie Sweetin.  I loved the idyllic representation of a non-traditional family whose comedic antics had adults and kids, alike rolling with laughter. Today, Jodie Sweetin gave birth to another child and headlines went up. That birth drives home for me a very simple truth: the cycle of life repeats itself.

For many that cycle–a child grows into an adult and has children of her own–is not a positive one. A little over a year ago, my cousin gave birth to a new baby. Addicted to meth, I worried about my cousin’s ability to stay clean and raise that child. She probably won’t get the chance because she was recently sentenced to 10 years under the supervision of the Department of Corrections in Colorado (my cousin’s child is under the care of her grandmother).  My cousin’s case is a mild one in comparison with some of  the more devastating effects of child abuse and neglect.

Right now, on the Western Slope, 15-year-old John Caudle is being held for evaluation pending trial for the murder of his mother and step father. He faces 80 years in prison for trying to free himself from the cycle of drug addiction and abuse wrought by his parents–by adults he was supposed to trust. Dozens more victims of abuse who, as children, took the law into their own hands sit idle in prison. Sentenced to terms as long as life without parole, they will likely never have the chance to break the cycle and lead lives as idyllic as the one portrayed in Full House.

Jodie Sweetin had her own struggle with methamphetamine. So far she’s been able to stay clean. She’s lucky; she got a second chance and we applaud her. Don’t child abuse victims sitting in prison for trying to get the same second chance deserve the same understanding?

Children are different from adults. Dozens of studies show that teens, in particular, lack the same decision-making capacity as adults and yet when they become inconvenient; when their parents fail them, we seek to discard them and put them in cold storage–many times for the rest of their lives. Why are those children any less deserving of society’s understanding than Jodie Sweetin?

Answers.com defines felony murder as:

An unlawful homicide that occurs in the commission or attempted commission of a felony, which is considered first degree murder by operation of this doctrine. In many modern statutes, only homicides that occur in the course of certain specified felonies are “felony murders.”

A Supreme Court ruling in May declared that juvenile life without parole was cruel and unusual punishment for juveniles who committed crimes other than homicide. Already, defense attorneys are using the decision to challenge felony murder doctrine as it applies to juveniles. A recent case filed in York County, Pennsylvania seeks relief for Michael A. Lehman who was 14 when he was sentenced to life in connection with the stabbing death of Kwame Beatty in 1988. Lehman’s attorney has filed a motion arguing for Lehman’s release on the basis that at no time did the state ever allege Lehman carried out the murder.

While the details of the Lehman case are unclear, under Colorado law the rules for charging felony murder include everything from unintended death resulting from arson all the way down to aiding in the immediate flight from a crime scene at which a death occurred.

There are currently at least 12 offenders serving life without parole for felony murders committed as juveniles. While the circumstances of each of these cases is unclear, there are several where the child’s greatest crime was to help a murder suspect leave the scene of the crime. Everyone knows the psychological principles behind ‘fight or flight.’ But dozens of studies show that teens’ decision-making faculties are not fully developed and that full brain maturation does not occur until at least the age of 24.

In light of the recent Supreme Court decision, new scientific evidence around brain research and recent challenges to the felony murder doctrine each case where a child simply sought to flee the scene of the crime (with or without the suspect), needs comprehensive and substantive review to determine if the juveniles in question were fully culpable and deserving of a life sentence.

A recent article in The Pueblo Chieftain by Jeff Tucker announces that the new direct file law passed this spring has gone into effect. The article lists the circumstances under which a juvenile can be direct filed by a district attorney as an adult. In general, a juvenile can now be charged as an adult by a district attorney if:

1. They are between 14 and 15 and commit 1st degree murder, 2nd degree murder or a violent sex offense.
2. Juveniles may also be charged directly by a district attorney if they are over 16 and commit certain felonies.

Pueblo District Attorney Bill Thiebaut complains that the new law doesn’t give District Attorneys enough discretion. Thiebaut told The Chieftan that he isn’t concerned with the 14-day waiting period that district attorneys must now adhere to in filing adult charges, but is concerned that the new law does not allow a district attorney’s office to use its discretion in choosing to file adult charges.

In a written statement to The Chieftain Thiebaut said, “Because the breadth of discretion that our legal system vests in prosecuting attorneys carries with it the potential for both individual and institutional abuse, a district attorney must be sensitive to the community norms while exercising the powers of the office, and to the broad discretion that the law vests in a district attorney’s decision-making.”

It is important to note that Thiebaut’s statement can be read several ways. If he meant to say that he has nearly as much discretion under the new law as he did under the old law, he should clarify that. If that’s not what he meant, he should be aware that the new law allows district attorneys an enormous amount of discretion.

While the enacted law lists criteria that district attorneys should follow in direct filing juveniles, it also makes absolutely clear (on page 5) that:

“The amount of weight given to each of the factors listed…is discretionary with the district attorney.”

Further, the act states (on page 7) that:

“At the discretion of the district attorney, the provisions [listed] shall not apply to charges for first degree murder…second degree murder…or any sexual offense eligible for direct file.”

The fact is that district attorneys still have TOO MUCH DISCRETION and are allowed, in effect, to be judge, jury and executioner when it comes to treating juveniles as adults. Prosecutors aren’t judges and shouldn’t be judges, but do have an ethical obligation to seek justice. Direct filing kids with no judicial review is unjust in the light of myriad studies that show kids don’t have the decision-making capacity of adults. District attorneys know that direct filing kids is wrong…they just have political reasons not to care.

By Mary Ellen Johnson, Executive Director, The Pendulum Foundation

John Caudle was fourteen-years-old when he killed his mother and step-father in their secluded home near Monte Vista, Colorado. The crime made national news. Parricide generally does.

There are two ways of handling a parricide case. If the child’s lucky, prosecutors and press will investigate before “creating a narrative.” They’ll key on one truth – kids who kill their parents generally have a very good reason, so let’s determine that reason before playing Mr. Hardcore and gunning for the kid’s life. Or, they’ll declare this kid is Satan’s spawn and we’re going to take him out.

In John Caudle’s case there was a bit of both. Looking at this skinny kid in over-sized glasses, the community didn’t see the devil in a tattered t-shirt. Plus stories of abuse immediately began circulating.

A family friend told us, “There are some really weird stories which make me think his mom was mentally unstable.  Joanne used to do some weird sadistic sorts of things that were more emotionally abusive and really cruel…Apparently, John kept quiet about a lot of the abuse because his mother would threaten him.  The stories I have heard from credible sources even involve John being tasered by his mom for punishment.  And this is when he was 7 or 8 years old.  John did not qualify for the school breakfast and lunch program because his step father made too much money.  Yet, his teachers noticed that he always seemed to have a lunch that looked scraped together.  And from the police report, when they went to the crime scene they noted very little food in the house.  Apparently, his mother and step-father would eat dinner and then when they finished John was allowed to make his own dinner.  Consequently, he lived on hot dogs and spaghetti.  I guess life is actually better in prison in some ways.  At least he gets regular meals.”

In many cases of child abuse, these kids are invisible to anyone with the authority to intervene. “I didn’t know anything was wrong,” they say after a tragedy.  “The parents seemed like nice people.” “He was a good student – a little different maybe. But we had no idea.” Such was not the case with John. Social Services followed Joanne and John through various states and investigations, including Colorado. Here, a teacher reported John after he came to school with a black eye. John was never removed from his house, though classes were ordered.

Despite the abuse, despite community sympathy, despite available legal alternatives to a harsh adult sentence, District Attorney David Mahonee believes it’s his duty to make sure a severely abused kid who got no help from the system and felt trapped in a endless nightmare, should be locked away for the rest of his natural life. Because make no mistake: when John Caudle is convicted — and he will be in a state where DA’s have a 90% conviction rate – he will be immediately sent into the adult prison system. No stopover in juvenile hall until John’s 18 or 21. No sir, not here in Colorado. Put him in with the biggest and baddest. He killed his parents, he was convicted, he deserves no mercy. And he won’t receive any.

John Caudle is still months away from trial. Because of Colorado law, he is kept isolated.  John exists in a legal limbo: the state says he’s an adult and he must be treated as an adult. The state also says he’s a kid and has to be kept separated from adults. However, since there are few accommodations for children in your local jail the solution is to keep him walled off from most human contact. While John’s attorneys are consumed by his case, pre-trial preparation  does NOT necessarily include a lot of one-on-one time with your client, especially when the jail is 45 minutes away.  During the school year former teachers volunteered to keep John abreast of his studies, but their visits averaged about 4 hours a week, and for the rest of the valley it’s still summer. No classes. Most of John’s time is spent watching television, sometimes reading, occasionally writing  letters. No friends. Little communication. Lots of time to think .No one to help him sort through his past, or his deed. Recently two other juveniles who were direct filed into the adult system and kept isolated as  John is being isolated, committed suicide.

Isn’t it ironic that a kid who went through hell with his parents is going through hell at the hands of the state?

Colorado by all accounts is under extreme fiscal stress. Indeed, a recent report by the Colorado Fiscal Policy Institute found that “job losses in 2009 and 2010 indicate a full rebound[from the Great Recession in Colorado] is years away.” In short hand that means a long-term slump in the tax base that supports warehousing children for the rest of their lives.

According to a recent opinion article by Paul Wachter at aolnews.com, the economic slump is the perfect opportunity for the Obama Administration to take up prison reform. StopDirectFile.org agrees and suggests that prison reform ought to start where the system is most detrimental to budgets: juvenile justice.

As Wachter notes, many prison reform activists argue that the justice system should focus more on rehabilitation efforts and reduce penalties…” But the reason we should focus on juvenile justice reform first is simply that society suffers the most prolonged effects of incarceration and repeat crime from juvenile offenders that we fail to reform or keep locked up because of the “heinousness of their crimes.”

What we fail to realize is that some of the “most heinous” criminals are also the least dangerous. In Colorado the Department of Corrections currently houses about 15 inmates who were sentenced to life as juveniles for crimes like aiding and abetting a murder suspect. While helping a known murder suspect get away with the crime certainly shows poor judgment and is certainly worthy of punishment, a life sentence might be a bit stiff. When you consider that the total cost to incarcerate those non-violent offenders is just under $500,000 per year, it just seems ridiculous. When you figure that over their lifetimes they’ll cost the state just over $26 million, you want to rip your hair out.

If anyone qualifies as a political enigma, Senate Majority Leader John Morse may be at the top of the list. A Democrat from traditionally conservative Colorado Springs, Morse made a career out of law enforcement and holds several advanced degrees including a PhD in Public Administration and an MBA. His tenure as a Sergeant in the Colorado Springs Police Department eventually led him to a long-term position as Police Chief in Fountain where he made community policing a hallmark of his department. StopDirectFile.org had the extraordinary opportunity to interview the lawmaker about criminal and juvenile justice issues. Judging from that interview, it is safe to say that Senator Morse stands at the pinnacle of leadership in the State of Colorado and it is our privilege to endorse him.

STOPDIRECTFILE.ORG: You’ve spoken a lot about the importance of Community Policing. What is community policing?

SENATOR MORSE: Community Policing is actively engaging the community in identifying and resolving the issues that lead to crime and disorder. So often, the police sort of figure out for themselves what the problems are or what they want to address and leave the community out of it. We sort of police on to the community instead of policing from within the community. So, community policing is actively working with the community to figure out what issues are important to them and how those issues should be addressed.

STOPDIRECTFILE.ORG:  Why did you choose to go into law enforcement?

SENATOR MORSE: I worked my way through college on a paramedic ambulance and every day I bounced out of bed and said ‘I get to go to work this morning.’ I was going to college; getting an accounting and finance degree. When I finished my degree, I went to work as a CPA and that was great, but I didn’t bounce out of bed every morning saying ‘I want to go to work today.’  With ambulances you sit and wait for calls to come in, but in a police department you get to go out and meet people and that’s exciting in its own right.  The police thing is fascinating on many different levels, but that’s how I got into it and eventually ended up being Chief of Police in Fountain.

STOPDIRECTFILE.ORG: What in your background and experience most informs your work as a state legislator?

SENATOR MORSE: I touched on the fact that I was a paramedic. The CPA also informs my work a great deal as I spent a year on the Joint Budget Committee. That was huge. After I left my position as Police Chief in Fountain, I was president and CEO of Silver Key Senior Services, a non-profit organization that enables people over 60 to stay in their homes as long as possible. That taught me about seniors and the importance of senior issues.  One of the things I learned at Silver Key, that seems to be common sense, is that dental work is so important because as you age into your 80s and 90s you lose your teeth. If you pay attention to seniors’ diet and see that they get at least one hot meal a day, the benefits are enormous, but if their teeth don’t support their nutrition their health deteriorates rapidly. Medicare doesn’t cover dental so when their teeth start to go bad you can just watch them lose their lives.

STOPDIRECTFILE.ORG: You seem very detail oriented. In 2008 you voted to reduce consequences for parolees who violate minor provisions of their parole. Can you tell us more about that legislation and what sort of budgetary implications it had?

SENATOR MORSE: I can’t be too specific without the fiscal note in front of me, but  we estimate it costs us about $28,000 per year to hold someone in prison. Keeping them on the street preferably as a law abiding, fully employed, productive member of society they’re actually contributing to the tax base.  You subtract the cost of incarceration and add the revenue from a productive citizen and it seems like a pretty good net improvement in the fiscal scheme of things. If you watch people long enough, especially as a police officer, it is only a matter of time before they violate a traffic law. When you’ve got somebody on parole, by definition you’re watching them very carefully. People are people and they’re going to make mistakes so you have to be able to differentiate between the stupid things and dangerous things parolees do that might be red flags. What this bill, in my view, was really about was making the distinction between those things so that we don’t send everybody back automatically, but we send just those back that really need to go back. Again, if you watch people long enough we will all make mistakes.

STOPDIRECTFILE.ORG: For you, what is the balance between punishment and rehabilitation?

I wish I had a pithy answer for the difference between punishment and rehabilitation. Punishment is sometimes absolutely necessary both from a societal standpoint as well as an individual standpoint. But punishment needs to be consistent with the crime committed and often we’re punishing people for the rest of their lives over once in a lifetime mistakes.  That’s not appropriate.

One thing we did last session, specifically in Colorado Springs, is we instituted a veteran’s court.  We send lots of young men and women to Iraq and Afghanistan  and they are submitted to huge stresses including  lots of blast injuries.  The soldiers within a block or two of a blast radius end up having their brains rattled. We’re now learning that some of those soldiers come back more aggressive, less patient, less tolerant of society and, for lack of a better term, ’snap.’ They end up doing something – drink and drive, incur accidents, abuse drugs.  We created the veteran’s court so that judges can consider why veterans might be acting out and devise ways to mitigate their behavior without necessarily putting them in prison and throwing away the key.  Its a pretty good idea, in my view. Every criminal probably has a ‘reason’ why they are the way they are.  So if we can start with this veteran’s court where we take the issues that people have and mitigate them and learn how to do that for everyone then we can start drilling down and say ‘hey, this kid is suffering PTSD related to the way that he was [abused] and that’s why [he] did this and this is how we can fix it to put [him] back on the straight and narrow.’

I think it is fascinating how we’re starting to realize that our soldiers aren’t fully responsible for what they’ve done. Sure we have to punish them and hold them accountable on the one hand, but we have to make darn sure they get the treatment they need so that they don’t fall back into this trap later. That’s a good idea. We should do that for everybody.

STOPDIRECTFILE.ORG: In 2010 you sponsored legislation that reduced drug use to a misdemeanor. Why did you decide to fight for reductions in sentencing?

SENATOR MORSE: We have to look at the system as a whole and what it is really accomplishing. If we’re dinging people for doing drugs, are we really accomplishing something? Is that really having a societal benefit? I think the answer is not only no, but hell no. People tried prohibition and that didn’t really work. You absolutely shouldn’t drink and drive. I have probably made more arrests for drinking and driving as a patrol officer in the Colorado Springs Police Department than any other patrol officer. If I were to go back to that, it would be the same. I would continue to make more DUI arrests because I think people’s lives can be totally altered in an instant because someone was drinking and driving. The reality is that people are going to drink and we should manage that so that it doesn’t have a down side for the rest of us, but we shouldn’t try to prohibit it. It just doesn’t work.

It is the same with drugs. I personally haven’t tasted alcohol. I’ve never been drunk. I’ve never done any drugs; never even been tempted to do drugs. You could legalize drugs tomorrow and I still wouldn’t do them. But I think we need to figure out how to help people get through their lives as opposed to just locking them up when they do something that we, as a society, find morally repugnant. We need to save our limited prison dollars for offenders that need to be locked up for a little while in order to make society safer.

STOPDIRECTFILE.ORG: Are kids redeemable and what do you think of the practice of direct file from a policy perspective?

SENATOR MORSE: Kids are absolutely redeemable. From a policy perspective, I think there are a couple of problems with direct file. First, direct file gives District Attorneys an awful lot of power. They get to decide whether or not to file [adult charges against kids]. I think that’s too much power to put in the hands of that particular office. Second, I think [the decision to file adult charges is] a matter of statewide concern, especially because the rest of us are going to have to pay for charging, trying and holding that person, in some cases, for the rest of their lives. Why are we leaving that up to an individual District Attorney who was only elected by 1/23 of the population when all of us are going to have to bear the cost? Direct file needs to be looked at very, very carefully. We also need to intervene early and often to make sure that kids don’t get into that situation.

STOPDIRECTFILE.ORG: Do you agree with Justice Clarence Thomas that state legislatures need to take up the issue of life sentences for kids?

SENATOR MORSE: I agree that state legislatures [should take up the issue of life sentences for kids]. I think we need to look very carefully at what we’re accomplishing. As a society, we have this idea that if we’re very tough on crime, criminals will recognize that and stop committing crimes and we’ll all live happily ever after. There isn’t a shred of evidence to support that theory and yet we’ve clung to it tenaciously for the last 25 years. So let’s stop, figure out what works and start implementing that. Let’s be careful about giving up on any human being, but especially children.  What I don’t think society gets is that we really only throw away 3% of [offenders]. The other 97% we put away for awhile and then they come back. What are they going to do when they come back? Are they going to be able to get jobs, provide for their families and become good taxpayers? No, they’re not because we make it darn near impossible. We say, ‘you can’t live here, you can’t work here, you can’t associate with these people and don’t forget to pay all your fees on time or we’ll put you back.’ We have to stop being just tough on crime and start being really, really, smart on crime.